About your Search

20120926
20121004
Search Results 0 to 17 of about 18
under the obama administration the u.s. experienced a morbid of the infrastructure of the economy, the public sector become a manipulative force intervenes in the financial sectors with gowrn tee that attract talent and -- [inaudible] >> the worst this is the grain cast of the obama administration. and the epa now has a game control over [inaudible] has deemed a po lou assistant, danger to the environment. and co2 is the manhattan and keeps us alive. the circle of life and attempt to oppress co2 epitomizes the kind of antinature, antiimper prize spirit of the administration. it's the reason we need another supply side of the same kind we had under ronald reagan. >> would you change anything you wrote in the original "wealth and poverty." >> i would have changed quite a lot. i mean, there. all kind of detail that have changed. but i found that do try to change one thing would be to change everything. so, you know, you have in to a bunch of editorial work. instead of changing it, i essentially retained the old book and added 30,000 new words at the beginning and end. and revision of
measures are identified. the eurozone remains the greatest risk for the global economy today. as i said earlier on, the ecb move from two weeks ago with the omc was clearly a turning point. but the countries have to really work together much more cohesively in a much more coordinated manner and order together turned the corner. as you know, european union and the eurozone in particular are not the only threats on the horizon. the united states is also currently a threat. the immediate concern is, many of you know that, is that under the current law there would be a dramatic tightening equal to about 4% of gdp. that's what is, refer to as the fiscal cliff. and that is good. it entails a contraction of 2% of gdp, and that is not good at all, especially if you consider the forecast of growth of the united states is pretty much in the range of 2%. so that is a racing any growth in the united states, would be the consequence of not dealing with the fiscal cliff and not dealing with the debt ceiling, which are both looming threats on the very short-term horizon. and it's not a threat just for
views on the global economy and perhaps you could start with europe and make your way around the world and perspective on what you see in terms of growth and perhaps more importantly you know, what are the challenges that we are going to have to deal with over the next period of time? >> there's not enough time for all the challenges but let me give you some perspective. let me get to -- let me give away the punchline. the punchline is i think in a world races, the world is not going to come to coming to an end. we are going to muddle through but there are a lot of challenges and a lot of risks that i think the largest outcome come the largest for signage likely outcome by far is that we get through it and a lot of action were to be taken to offer some relief but there are several things that could cause things to derail in which case it would be a lot tougher for a lot longer. but you asked about europe. i think the biggest problem that europe has is growth and the risk problem is the go off the rail, bus stop of the euro. a few months ago we would have said that the two big issues fo
has been participating, provided a substitute economy and afghanistan to start up allow me to develop so far. is that the incentive? is there some economic incentive that brings them into this process? is it that that's going to solve the problem is it's not constitutional matters in human rights and everything clicks >> we need to start reducing the amount of money these then on afghanistan. >> howell to be sustainable within itself? >> the economic process is one where we have to keep helping the afghans fun the development for 10 years beyond what they get on with developing the mineral resources. at the same time, trying to execute a political process to reduce the pressure in the security forces and wouldn't have to be so proficient if there is a political process. you have to work on all these things at once. i've always said we must make our strategy dependent on the political deal with the taliban because that gives them a veto. you have to be a policy that says, here's the strategy that is not dependent on the taliban. the taliban to stop inciting and get an engaged the proce
with hundreds of billions of dollars and most of the discretionary spending cuts would drive the economy back into recession and cost too many jobs of the other hand would also go a long way to produce budget deficits. even by washington standards that seems pretty important. to discuss the cliff and its consequences of a panel of the four but it did it cover in budget watchers. bob greenstein is on the senate priorities and that of president obama's transition team policy work. douglas holtz-eakin is president of the american action forum and headed the domestic policy staff in the campaign ad was the director of the congressional budget office. donald marron is the director of the tax policy center and member of george bush's advisor and acting director of cbo and finally, digamma rogers blogs as an economist and was the chief economist of the house budget committee for the democratic staff of the house ways and means committee. the format today will be relatively straightforward. each of the panelists will speak for five minutes. i will ask some questions and we will get a discussion going
, and yes, we have taken it to account the kind of shocks the could apply to economies if and when, which i hope is never, the price of oil and the price of energy was to skyrocket more than it is at the moment. but you could take pretty much any area of the world where there are latin complex, not that want to minimize iran clearly, but all such conflicts could themselves entail economic consequences that we have to be mindful of when we model. i don't want to sort of list those parts of the world where conflicts could arise and would have consequences, but this is, you know, as beckett used to say, this is life and his no cure for that. [laughter] >> next question. >> hello, thank you for your talk this morning. i'm with china centric television in washington, d.c. and my question is regarding china but in relation to the global financial crisis, what policy decisions and actions which are like to see from china in the coming months? >> i think policy decisions have been announced already very much so. i'll distinguish between short-term and medium-term. short term there's an announcement
of europe are. the economy is teetering on the edge of recession. the were seen can do is jacked up taxes on small businesses and entrepreneurs or job creators. that makes it all the more likely to push us into a recession. and for the 23 million people who struggling for work, the worst thing to do is hurt the small businesses that create those jobs. >> it is fair to say that the president has reduced taxes. he has reduced taxes for small businesses 18 times. he cut taxes for '95 -- for 95% of families out there. the question is do we ask everybody to sacrifice? when you look at the marginal rate in the united states, when ronald reagan took office, the marginal office with 71% to 72%. it is interesting to me that the greatness that people speak of in terms of the united states, when we talk about the 1940's, the 1950's, the 1960's, 1970's, the marginal rate that folks paid was much greater. nobody says we will go back to that. at the same time, during the clinton years, we had marginal rates that were a little bit higher than they are now and we had some of the best economic times that
, handful decisions are but we're going to have to face them spent fixing the economy sunday at 8 p.m. on c-span's q. and a. >> next a form on the 2012 elections focusing on demographics, the economy and a center for american progress report on how the presidential candidates can get the electoral votes they need to win. we wished as much of the hour and have even as we can until our live coverage at nine eastern. >> good afternoon, everyone. my name is daniella gibbs leger and i'm vice president for american values and newt gingrich are at the center for american progress. i want to thank you for joining us. for the past, rogue demographics, economics and voter registration, voter ideology in the 2012 election. and i want to wish you all paid happy voter registration day. i'm sure everyone in this room s registered to vote. this is being cohosted by two fantastic teams. if we are just a few weeks before the election and i know that may seem like a very short time but in politics it's a lifetime. we were interested in taking down into what is actually happening in the states. what trends we
even lose our country. >> ross perot, interviewed by "usa today"'s richard wol on the economy, the deficit and debt and how it's changed since he ran for president in 1992 and '96. find richard wolffe's article in today's edition of "usa today" and at usa today.com. raz perot tonight -- ross perot tonight on c-span at 9 eastern. >>> next, a look at the presidential campaign with libertarian party candidate gary johnson. the former republican governor of new mexico talks about his view of the two-party system and obstacles for third-party candidates. from "washington journal," this is 40 minutes. >> host: joining us now is gary johnson, the former governor of new mexico, a republican 1995-2003 who is now the libertarian presidential nominee, and gary johnson, first question. when you look at the major party candidates and this year's cycle, what's missing in the debate and the dialogue? and what do you wring to the table -- what do you bring to the table? >> guest: well, how about truth for starters. the notion that both obama and romney are arguing over who's going to spend mo
getting schooled in the economy. the way to fix it, to reverse that, to offset is use the political system to get that result. in the political system, we can rearrange so what was lost in the economics is indicated more and more unequal is recouped by using politics. where the majority votes, where the majority rules is a perfectly logical way of thinking. and this has occurred to the rich as well. and to the corporations as well. so the more the system produces inequality, the more urgent it becomes for those benefiting from the inequality capitalism producers to control the politics because the alternative would be good. they're not going to do that. they're not going to allow the political system to function undoes what they have achieved in their mind in the economic system. they're not going to do that. see you can watch as america becomes more and more unequal, then it becomes necessary for politics to become more and more dependent on the money, dependent on the corporations to provide contributions to the economy, to the party more important than those things, the army of lobbyist
apparatus, political dimension is making us forget the economy factors. there would be no democracy in the region if we don't have economic stability. to open up countries or open the market is something we know in africa. happened before. to deal with the arab world as we are very happy these people are for justice and we don't care which kind of political and economic policy for new positioning we get in the global economy which is very naive and we have to be cautious with this. we were dealing with this, something which is not as easy as this. it is if i have to talk about an intellectual revolution that is changing and we have to cope with this and hope the new generation are going to start from there. this is the beginning of the book and also saying hosni mubarak didn't know what was happening that -- many people were arrested because they were in the west and they were arrested. they knew something was happening. the american ambassador sent a note to the american government saying there are young people who want to get to the hosni mubarak regime before september of 2011 so
in the american economy. if we did get a decision on the grand bargain that the ten year time frame of how we would manage the cuts and spending and tax increases and investments, because we need to do all three. we need the tax, we need to cut and invest in the sources of our strength. i think that would just have a huge -- americans feel like children are permanently divorcing parents, and i think it is like a poll on the country in a lot of ways. so second, if we had a grand bargain on energy, how to exploit the bounty of natural gas in particular in the environmentally safe and sustainable way on the national basis i think those two things together would have a huge impact. so the question is how close are we to that? and i was saying about the middle east but it may apply to american politics is all important politics happens the morning after the morning after. so, i think -- hearing talking about the election. i don't know how the election is going to come up and make no predictions but i do ask myself if romney gets smashed i don't think the political problem is we have a center left
the economies of nations in order to make up for their own mistakes, if integrity and honesty have not prevailed on the international relations and all nations and governments were treated equally and justly in the global effort to build and expand happiness for the entire mankind, and if other unfavorable situations have not occurred, in human life, imagine how beautiful and pleasant our lives and how lovely the history of mankind would have been. let us take a look at the world situation today. indymac, the economic situation. poverty is on the rise and the gap is widening between the rich and the poor. millions of industrial countries have exceeded $63 million while the repayment of half of this amount is sufficient to eradicate poverty in the world. the economy is dependent upon consumerism and exploitation of all who serve the interest of a limited number of countries. the creation of paper assets by using influence and control over the world's economic centers constitutes the greatest abuse of history and is considered a major contributor to global economic crisis. it has been reported tha
wants to emphasis in the campaign. he wants the campaign to be obviously about the economy and about our unemployment rate. and it's an unusual position for republican to be in to be running against democrat who has a strong record on national security. i think that's been difficult for the romney campaign, you know, i have worked for both republicans and democrats in various administrations, so i'm not a political person. but if seems to me that republicans always try to run to the right of a democrat and sometimes accuse democrats of being weak on national security. on this election you have president obama who have taken us out of iraq. president obama who has waged a tough war against al qaeda and has gone off the leadership note tbli osama bin laden who has taken out from the terrorist on yemen -- and president obama because of the actions in the very pressive record has boosted american credibility in some parts of the world. governor romney has been trying to assert that president obama is not strong enough on foreign policy. he hasn't supported israel enough. or not as tough as h
taxes. is their anybody that thinks that raising taxes will help the economy? no, his plan is to continue what he's done before. the status quo has not worked. we cannot afford four more years of barack obama and we are not going to have four more years of barack obama the first thing in the article here is getting medicare costs under control is the number-one priority and the most untouchable thing, but that is critical cause more trouble than any of the problem we've got fiscally in the united states. getting medicare costs under control is the number-one thing. >> you say we also surcharged smokers and the obese for their medicare coverage. where did that idea come from? >> i am the person that put it in the memo but i didn't have to fight very hard for it. also, i ran into this, something i ran in "the washington post" install of calling people morbidly obese i called them mega fatties and i was refuted by "the washington post" for being insensitive, which i guess i probably am. this is another thing where everybody knows this to be true and someone has to pay for it.
the economy takes all the oxygen out of the election was a little bit of foreign affairs committee supreme court doesn't play among independent, undecided voters. it's a motivator for one space to get out and get to the polls because you want this person to replace justice ginsburg when she retires, for example. health care is the only thing that resonates. i don't know of any practical, it would be the point that the obama administration defends the defense of marriage act and president romney will defend the constitutionality, but it doesn't seem that social conservative question has a lot of allotted salience in some unlike a presidential debate. so i think other than health care i see much happening. >> i think it will not happen. and here is why. no major national political figure has attacked affirmative action publicly since 1996 or before. it is kind of remarkable. the republicans during the 90s for a while were seen some political profit in attacking affirmative action given the polls. don't do it anymore and the democrats, john kerry and the early 90s, joe lieberman in the early
to fix washington so that it is a place that is about results. we've got to grow the economy. we talked about some strategies today. i've got a plan that encourage you to check out on the website. it's basically about infrastructure investment. the kind of small business to level the playing field we did. we've got to find common ground and fix the budget. congress is stopping progress right there. there's too much division in congress and that's why s&p and moody's is basically saying we've got to put some people in there who are willing to compromise. the challenge that is on the table before us right now is this issue of sequester. i've laid out a pretty simple straightforward plan, but the bush tax cuts expire as planned over 500,000, fix medicare, take away unnecessary subsidies. then you get a $100 billion annual cut down to a $23 billion in savings that i know we can find. it's time for specifics. it's time for action but it's time for working together. allen: thank you for this opportunity have this debate here today. tim, you can't talking about that plan. we still that mohamme
afghanistan where the bulk of the troop surgeinciy unfolded, the economy is principally agricultural. most men are working the fieldsv were doing some sort of job that is related to agriculture. the u.s. government includedhemh pghtly that one key way to helo the afghan people would be toze, the farming toh try to provide them with somes o better seeds and fertilizer and in some cases, tractors and try to improve what they were goingl so thatle you would improve ther livelihood as a result, he woull sort of helped them out. so the problem was we tried to do too much of it at once. a h think of southern afghanistan and the farmers there is a of i, parched amman on a hot day.m ine instead of giving them a tall glass of ice water, we literallt turned the fire hose on him, ruining him on the process. beig we tried to pour so much moneypd in bed it wound up becomingy, counterproductive. this was a program that was trying to spend $300 million in and just two provinces in one year. not surprisingly, we wound upr t shoveling the goods of afghanthy and they drove it over to the border to pakistan and
Search Results 0 to 17 of about 18